Marines might replace M-16A2 with M-4

Pacific Edition, Stars and Stripes ^ | Sunday, August 4, 2002 | Mark Oliva

[xsrdx]

A shorter barrel means reduced velocity and accuracy at long ranges

The only substantive difference between the M4 and M16A4 is the barrel length (14.5" vs 20") and the buttstock (collapsible vs. fixed).

The M4 is proving wildly popular everywhere, especially with law enforcement, as it's easy to tote around and still offers much of the lethality of a rifle.

Problem is, it's not a rifle -it's a carbine. The short barrel cuts the velocity of the issue M855 considerably, and reduces not only it's effective range but also its terminal performance. Yup, they're bitching about the ammunition - ammunition which, by the way, works just fine from a standard 20" barrel. And while were on the subject, the 11 and 14.5in barreled M4s remain statistically somewhat less reliable than 20" rifles, due to reduced gas system length.

The right answer is to purchase quantities of both rifles, and issue the long guns to troops most likely to need them.

For a tanker, artillerymen or aviator, the M4 is a great rifle. For the infantryman, the 20" M16A4 is the superior choice.

[demlosers]

I was reading a report on the army of Isreal. They wanted a gun like the AK that would run all the time because their FAL jammed too often. Turns out the Isreal Army men didn't clean their guns very often.

It always amazes me when soldiers don’t take care of their rifle especially in time of war. You would think they would treat their rifle better than a new born baby...If their rifle goes down its may mean their @$$ in combat.

[demlosers]

Problem is, it's not a rifle -it's a carbine. The short barrel cuts the velocity of the issue M855 considerably, and reduces not only it's effective range but also its terminal performance. Yup, they're bitching about the ammunition - ammunition which, by the way, works just fine from a standard 20" barrel.

Good points -- it's not rocket science:
shorter barrel = reduced velocity.
shorter barrel = reduced effective range.
They do seemed to be overlooking the obvious.

[COL. FLAGG]

The one thing about the M16A2 was it had a nice sturdy plastic stock that you could butt stroke someone with. Can you do that with the M4 and does the M4 hold up if you have to fix bayonets?

I heard a news report a couple days ago that a soldier from the 82nd in Afghanistan was given an article 15 for butt stroking a handcuffed Taliban POW. So, I guess you can still effectively use the M-4 for that purpose, but the M-16A2, with it's relatively large stock is probably a better weapon for smashing people upside the head. The M-16A2, with it's longer barrel, would also be the better rifle to attach a bayonet to. However, overall, the M-4 looks like a better, more versatile weapon than M-16A2 IMO.

[Yasotay]

I agree totally ... a carbine might be nice in tight quarters but limiting the riflemen in an infantry squad to 200m is insane. One reason the British Army was destoryed in Afganistan is because the Afgans could out range the British with their rifles. I personally would have liked to seen a new version of the G-11. Caseless ammo should be the way to properly save on weight and increase the performance of the ammunition.

[section9]

What do I think?

How many stores do we have of the M-14 in the Army and Marine inventories?

That's what I think.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[mouser]

when you take into consideration weight and all factors
i would like to see them try a mini 30 or beefed up
m-16 in 6mm ppc it gives you a lot for not any more recoil
and not much more weight i would want a 85 to 90 gr bullet

[thescourged1]

From my personal experiences with the M-4, it is perfectly functional and not too much different overall from the M-16A2. The only real big differences is the M-4's portability and the drop of the bullet at ranges over 250 meters. It is ideally suited for MOUT. I wasn't impressed by all the gadgets that could be added to it (reflex sight, infrared sight, pistol grip) and the stock did seem a bit flimsy. BTW, those infrared laser-pointer sights work both ways; you can see the beam through a pair of NODS (night vision gogs) and bird-dog your position very well. But then my worries were over when the Platoon Sergeant took my M-4 away and made me a SAW gunner. :p

10th Mountain BUMP!

[Mr. Thorne]

Just out of curiousity, I saw a Hechler and Koch Battle Rifle mentioned favorably once upon a time.

Could any of my fellow 'gun nuts' here at FR inform as to the specs of that weapon?

Just curious...

[Yasotay]

H & K has many great rifles but has taken a "black-eye" with their British division and the SA-80. I personally have their HK91, USC, and SL-8 (and love them). I am an ex infantry guy (10+ years as an "E" & "O"), I grew up on the M-16A1&2 but I love the M-14. I really believe that HK's "highpoint" in design was their G-11. Had the Army & Marines been really serious they should have continued with the G-11. You can go to Google and search under H&K and get the specs.

[Nov3]

The 16 will shoot to 1000. The marines use it competitively. I have never had one jam and I have had them pretty dirty. The original AR-15 (Air Force) M-16 (Army) that had no forward assist would jam as you describe and had a well desrved bad reputation (caused in part by ammo). The newer ones are without peer.

I will leave it up to you to carry a M-14 all day!!!!!

[semaj]

FNFAL BUMP

[Mr. Mojo]

If only we could have a picture of Ann Coulter holding one of these, that would be awesome.

Yeah, but unfortunately it's more likely that there's a picture of Diane Feinstein holding one ......before a Senate committee.

[xm177e2]

Do you mean the G36? That's a very nice rifle.

[connectthedots]

The one thing about the M16A2 was it had a nice sturdy plastic stock that you could butt stroke someone with. Can you do that with the M4 and how does the M4 hold up if you have to fix bayonets?

When I went through ROTC 'Advanced Camp' many, many years ago, I ruptured a guys spleen with a well placed butt stroke with a pugel stick. I can only imagine that a similar stroke on an enemy soldier would have just about torn out the front part of a rib cage. The bottom corner of the M16 butt stock is pretty pointed and the PSI on a well placed blow must be tremendous.

[AmericanDave]

Yes, Armalite has the AR-10 .308 for that modern look and good old reach out and touch someone range! I guess someone in DOD has ruled out the .308 caliber period...........

[AmericanDave]

Isn't the Galil an AK action in 7.62 Nato (.308)?

[Trailerpark Badass]

And while were on the subject, the 11 and 14.5in barreled M4s remain statistically somewhat less reliable than 20" rifles, due to reduced gas system length.

Just for clarification, the M4 (14.5" barrel) has the same length of barrel in front of the gas port as the M16A1/A2. I only shoot my M4 for fun, but I have had no reliability issues with it. Of course, my Colt commando upper (11.5" barrel) runs just fine, also.

[Trailerpark Badass]

Isn't the Galil an AK action in 7.62 Nato (.308)?

They're chambered in 5.56, as well. The Isrealis are phasing them out, in favor of the M16-family. Galils are too heavy and difficult to mount optics on. Iron sights are obsolete.

[Shooter 2.5]

"i would like to see them try a mini 30

Take a Mini-30 and shoot a magazine full of ammo through it. Then try to fire 5 rounds inside a eight inch circle at 100 yards.